Newsweek poll: Social cons love Rudy, have no idea he’s not a social con

posted at 6:42 pm on March 3, 2007 by Allahpundit

I blogged about this two weeks ago when Gallup polled on it but it’s important enough to warrant a follow-up. First, the good news for Rudy supporters. Newsweek survey says:

newsweek.png

Note the trend, too. Now click, scroll down, and take a long look at questions 22 through 27. Re: abortion, Gallup found 21% of Republicans thought he was pro-life and 36% didn’t know what his position is; the Newsweek poll finds those numbers at 11% and 49%, respectively, among social cons and 12% and 51% among Republicans generally. Despite all the press lately, for a lot of people the hard news still has yet to break.

Question 25 hints at how bad the fallout might be. Demanding licenses for gun ownership would, surprisingly, help him on balance — if the issue is taken in isolation. Combine it with his stance on abortion and civil unions and it might have the effect of hardening opposition among social cons who otherwise would consider voting for him. As for question 27, news like this won’t help:

“There’s obviously a little problem that exists between me and his wife,” the younger Mr. Giuliani said. “And we’re trying to figure that out. But as of right now it’s not working as well as we would like.”…

He said that he and his father had recently begun trying to reconcile. “For a while there, we weren’t talking, for a decent amount of time,” Andrew said. “But lately we’ve been having more contact and trying to figure things out.”

Ace is at CPAC and has anecdotal evidence that social cons don’t care what Giuliani’s domestic policies are. He’s the hawk of hawks, baptized by fire on 9/11, and they want him because they think he’ll win the war. Period.

I leave you with this dry-heave-inducing passage from a WashTimes article whose lede reveals the paper to be squarely in the tank for their man Mitt:

In interviews afterward, some attendees said Mr. Giuliani lost momentum when he heaped lavish praise on Abraham Lincoln.

While many conservatives regard the Civil War president as the spiritual founder of the Republican Party, others deeply resent him as a man who ruthlessly suspended constitutional rights and freedoms in order to militarily challenge the South’s belief in its right to secede. Some saw similar disdain for individuals’ rights in Mr. Giuliani’s successful war on crime in New York City.

lincoln.JPG

Update: KP was at CPAC and confirms that most of the social cons she spoke to didn’t know Giuliani’s track record:

But at the end of the day, probably more of them will end up being like the members of the Bible study group that Ace describes, who despite being “strongly pro-life” support Giuliani because they think he will keep them safe. What strikes me as strange about this is I can almost guarantee that these are the same people who would ask me how I could be a Christian and a Democrat, since the majority of Democrats are pro-choice. Yet, they overlook their pro-life views for Giuliani and seem fairly unconflicted about it.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I guess for many people the predominant image of Rudy is still from 9/11 and the immediate aftermath. As knowledge of his policy positions spread, it’s going to be interesting to see what Rudy does and what the social cons do to deal with all the cognitive dissonance in that survey.

INC on March 3, 2007 at 6:54 PM

I think if he continues to emphasize his view on judicial nominations, he’ll get a pass from many pro-lifers. Nominating judges is the only way that the POTUS can directly affect social policy.

SWLiP on March 3, 2007 at 7:07 PM

That passage from the Times is absolutely jaw-dropping. It could have come from a bowdlerized version of the Kode of the Klan.

Il Padrino on March 3, 2007 at 7:12 PM

If the nation is not secure, and we aren’t winning the war on terror, we won’t have the luxury of arguing over things like gay marriage. As long as Rudy demonstrates he will be a national securirity hawk, and promises to appoint more conservative judges, I think he can win this.

Only 20 more months! haha

brak on March 3, 2007 at 7:17 PM

Only 12 more months of political posturing (that wont mean anything 2 weeks after they say it) until primaries. Time to go on vacation until next January.

csdeven on March 3, 2007 at 7:28 PM

A lot of gun owners like Guiliani, except that with a Dem Congress, there exists the very real suspicion that he’ll sell us out to get something he deems much more important.

Bush said he’d sign a reauthorization of the AWB. Are we to believe that Rudy will be a more steadfast supporter of the 2nd Amendment than Bush?

PeteRR on March 3, 2007 at 7:30 PM

Rudy’s stance on guns doesn’t worry me too much because a)he was mayor of NYC at a time when the murder rate was what 2,500 a year? In that situation, enforcing strict gun laws may seem like the wise strategy
and b)gun control is complete non starter in Congress. (for now)

billy on March 3, 2007 at 7:40 PM

Coulter on a future H&C:
Oh come on, Republicans do not monolithically hate The Gays.
In fact, Rudy has even shacked up with a couple of them.

But it won’t matter. Even if hers is bigger she can’t bully Rudy.
There will come a time when people are reminded that Rudy put his boot up Arafat’s ass. And people will be reminded that Rudy has already spit on Saudi oil money.

Push comes to shove, Rudy’s a hitter not a runner.
The whole damned country knows that.

Stephen M on March 3, 2007 at 7:43 PM

and b)gun control is complete non starter in Congress. (for now)

National support for gun laws is very low too. I think support for loosening gun laws is on the rise as well.

lorien1973 on March 3, 2007 at 7:44 PM

Four years from now, I strongly believe we’ll have pundits questioning who will be running for presidency, and they will constantly be retorted by their guests about how poorly announcing a run too soon turned out back in 2007.

Savage on March 3, 2007 at 7:46 PM

I consider myself to be conservative, and I like Rudy…I look for results and the man is one you can count on to get the job done. He and I are not lockstep in our beliefs, but I think it is all a wash in the end..

Pam on March 3, 2007 at 8:01 PM

Savage on March 3, 2007 at 7:46 PM

You got that right…….. too much time until the actual votes are cast…. It’s like the first week of football season, and the pundits, like in this case, are talking about the play-offs.

I still believe there are two issues that will win the day:

“Secure the Border, and Win the War!”

But what about “Healthcare?”

“Secure the Border, and Win the War!”

But what about “Civil Unions” and “Gay Rights”?

“Secure the Border, and Win the War!”

But what about “Global Warming”?

“Secure the Border, and Win the War!”

But what about a Woman’s right to “Choose”?

“Secure the Border, and Win the War!”

What about Taxing the “Rich”?

“Secure the Border, and Win the War!”

See……. catching, isn’t it?

PinkyBigglesworth on March 3, 2007 at 8:13 PM

I too consider myself to be a conservative but I wouldn’t vote for him if he was the only person running. In that direction I see only more big government, big deficit spending, amnesty for illegals, gun control etc. and on most of those issues 6 years has been more than enough. There is more on the menu than Democrat or Democrat lite you know.

Buzzy on March 3, 2007 at 8:18 PM

Follow up note:

Don’t forget, the “Clinton War Room” NEVER closes……..

Remember the Terminator?…..”they don’t bleed, they don’t feel pain, they don’t feel pitty, or remorse, they will never stop, EVER, until you are DEAD! DON’T YOU GET IT?”

PinkyBigglesworth on March 3, 2007 at 8:20 PM

I’m sure the social conservatives really, really wish Rudy Giuliani believed as they do, but they don’t have to hold their nose to vote for him. They know he’s a leader, not an opinion watcher. They know he’ll put this country first. He’s not a shoo-in for the Nomination, but he’s worth their vote in the general election should he be the Nominee.

Failing to prevent a House Speaker Pelosi should at least show we’re better off with him as President than Saint Obama, Queen Hillary, or The Straight Arrow John. Deal with your issues of the Republican Congress in Congress. Don’t take it out on the Presidency.

hadsil on March 3, 2007 at 8:26 PM

Social cons love Rudy, have no idea he’s not a social con

Not a suprise. People vote on appeal not on ideology. Mitt looks far to slick, a pre packaged politician to have appeal in the south, between two carpetbaggers Rudy’s got the edge. With 9/11 in his hip pocket and kicking Arafat?( or some terrorist) out of New York, refusing funds from a person that sugessted that America brought the attacks on herself. I find it hard to beleive Mitt could look more conservatie than Rudy. Rudy needs enough to get through the primaries. Once that is done he is home free for the general election. Appeal folks.

Clarity:
Rudy has time to juxtapose his beliefs against his policy. Leaning towards anti-federalism on issues ensulates him. Really Rudy seems more of a liberal libertarian than a blanket conservative. As long as he belives in states rights and the constitution I’m still with him.

Guns:
As far as guns are concerned who cares? A bill won’t get past Congress. Not in this enviroment. The Brady bill was carried by public opinion we do not have a similar catalyst today.

Abortion:
All ready put to rest. Praising Scalia put me at ease. Although I would not mind Rudy answering: Of the current judges that seem to be inline for SCOTUS which three would make your short list?

Janice R. Brown seems a good choice for Rudy.

Theworldisnotenough on March 3, 2007 at 8:34 PM

These are some staggering numbers, IMO, and honestly it’s going to come down to national security issues and who you trust in a time of crisis.

Sure, enough can change before the real balloting starts, but he’s a known quantity and anyone who doesn’t know about his social stances is, quite frankly, clueless. He’s going to pull a lot of independent votes and quite a few Democrat votes in the general election (assuming he gets there).

JammieWearingFool on March 3, 2007 at 8:34 PM

While many conservatives regard the Civil War president as the spiritual founder of the Republican Party, others deeply resent him as a man who ruthlessly suspended constitutional rights and freedoms in order to militarily challenge the South’s belief in its right to secede. Some saw similar disdain for individuals’ rights in Mr. Giuliani’s successful war on crime in New York City

Was Lincoln a tyrant? Probably but I can’t argue with the results. Guiliani did nothing againt civil rights from anything I have read thus far. Rudy successfully neutered Sharpton and Jesse by getting people into jobs and off of welfare, darn…

Theworldisnotenough on March 3, 2007 at 8:37 PM

Uh, I understand the ignorance angle, but why are you making the inference that social cons love Rudy based on the first poll? Isn’t that as much, if not more, of an indication of socons’ disdain for McCain? I suspect that even if these same socons were to learn where Giuliani stood on their pet issues, the poll wouldn’t change dramatically.

McCain has historically treated the socons like crap, and they have long memories. At least Giuliani has been marginally consistent in his positions and has been a far better practitioner of the “big tent” philosophy than McCain. His position on judges (which is the core of the socons’ political strategy) is and has always been, to my knowledge, consistent with the socon position, i.e. strict constructionism. McCain has a dismal record on that issue, e.g. the Gang of 14.

In short, I know Rudy’s positions on social issues, and I’d still vote for the man over McCain any day.

spmat on March 3, 2007 at 8:42 PM

I too consider myself to be a conservative but I wouldn’t vote for him if he was the only person running. In that direction I see only more big government, big deficit spending, amnesty for illegals, gun control etc. and on most of those issues 6 years has been more than enough. There is more on the menu than Democrat or Democrat lite you know.

Buzzy on March 3, 2007 at 8:18 PM

On fiscal issues, look at his record in NYC, he made that city business friendly and ran a budget surplus.
As far as gun control goes, there just isn’t popular support,outside the major urban areas, for more restrictions.
If he’s good on judicial nominations, and we know he’s strong on the war, he seems to be the guy regardless of his personal stance on social issues.

Immigration? I’m afraid we’re going to have to embrace the suck no matter who wins.

billy on March 3, 2007 at 9:09 PM

As far as gun control goes, there just isn’t popular support,outside the major urban areas, for more restrictions.

That’s a nice sentiment, but a weak President encourages the anti’s. Endless press releases after high profile shootings attacking different categories of firearms. There will be daily questions to President Guiliani about his position on saturday night specials, assault weapons, sniper rifles, etc. If he isn’t steadfast we’ll be treated to repeated gun laws being proposed. And some will make it to his desk.

Will he resist the siren song of the Editorial pages encouraging him to “grow” in office or will he heed the poll of the day and sign away our 2nd Amendment Rights.

PeteRR on March 3, 2007 at 9:36 PM

Abraham Lincoln was the greatest president this country ever had. He did what he had to do to win the war. I can’t believe the Washington Times would write something so stupid.

packsoldier on March 3, 2007 at 9:49 PM

I know we’re a long way out from the vote but to a lot of Conservatives Rudy Giuliani isn’t “the man” at this point in time. Those of us who are looking at the border as a major national security issue and illegal immigration as a major crime issue certainly don’t see the status quo as something we should strive for. Those that have lost their jobs to corporate outsourcing or whose big rigs are empty because Mexican drivers in Mexican trucks are now carrying what were our loads want something more than the status quo. Those of us who are worried about the North American Trade Union certainly aren’t happy about the status quo especially when our land is going to be taken from us by the government and handed to some Spanish company for Mexican use. The GOP just doesn’t seem to understand that these are all issues where they have lost a lot of support in the past couple of years. To many these issues have grown at least as important as “the war” to many and we aren’t going to necessarily support someone that offers us just the “status quo” on these issues. Twirling away from questions by invoking “states rights” means little when the State’s by and large have been stripped of their rights by Federal assistence bribery and withholding of Federal grant funds if they don’t comply. We want hard, fast, and solid answers on what they believe in because some day, if they get in office, it may just come down to that.

Buzzy on March 3, 2007 at 11:39 PM

Newt, stop this madness!!

- The Cat

P.S. Some times I feel like Mike Doonesbury waiting for Mario Cuomo to run.

MirCat on March 4, 2007 at 12:11 AM

Going solely on public statements Al Gore is more pro-life than Giuliani. Yet when it comes to Supreme Court nominations what will happen? Bottom line is if you think abortion is immoral (it is) vote Republican.

aengus on March 4, 2007 at 12:22 AM

I just caught the CPAC exit poll.

Mitt won… Rudy was second. America’s mayor better step up his game. Mitt does have him by the short hairs on gay marriage.

Theworldisnotenough on March 4, 2007 at 1:07 AM

Romney is for a fence on the border, against amnesty, against gun control and hasn’t appeared on TV in a dress.

Buzzy on March 4, 2007 at 2:38 AM

On fiscal issues, look at his record in NYC, he made that city business friendly and ran a budget surplus.
As far as gun control goes, there just isn’t popular support,outside the major urban areas, for more restrictions.
If he’s good on judicial nominations, and we know he’s strong on the war, he seems to be the guy regardless of his personal stance on social issues.

Immigration? I’m afraid we’re going to have to embrace the suck no matter who wins.

billy on March 3, 2007 at 9:09 PM

How do you know he’s “strong on the war”? Because he says so? The same reason some people believe he’s appoint Scaliaesque judges–because he says so, despite his record in NY?

The expression is “If it looks like a duck and it walks like a duck…” Nothing about talking like a duck.

honora on March 4, 2007 at 12:14 PM

If Rudy gets nominated I think he’ll add newt as his vp

jp on March 4, 2007 at 3:34 PM

If Rudy gets nominated I think he’ll add newt as his vp

jp on March 4, 2007 at 3:34 PM

You really Newt settling for the #2 spot? Well I guess stranger things have happened.

honora on March 4, 2007 at 4:07 PM